Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t huge military related cities. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were ports for trading and transporting, but it didn’t matter because the Allies had a naval blockade. Another thing was why would they need such big bombs, the U.S. were doing constant bomb runs in Tokyo. Was this something they wanted to prove to the Russians because of the two countries failing relations? (Freeman).

The Russians were slaughtering the Japanese on mainland because the Japanese had a style of guerilla warfare (Bernstien). The Russians killed 600,000 Manchurian troops the best branch of the Japanese army. The Russians did it in a week, which is more than the U.S. killed in the Pacific theatre and the Russians did it in a week!  The Japanese already lost in the Pacific to the U.S. probably one of the hardest terrains to fight against a guerrilla typed military, but the U.S. won (Nardo). Why couldn’t they do that in the mainland? The U.S. had military power, better trained troops, and more help than the Japanese.

Some people state that the dropping of the bomb would stop the war, but that is not entirely true. Japan was already looking for help to the Russians to make a peace offering to the U.S. for them (Bernstien). The Japanese had no resources, their navy and air force were gone, and no way of getting those resources because they were naval blockaded by the allies. The Japanese already knew they lost the war. Even the U.S. soldiers knew the bombings were unjustified and not necessary (Nardo).

The atomic bombs weren’t necessary to defeat Japan. Japan was already running on a thin line and was on the brink of defeat. The atomic bomb didn’t really do anything besides wipe two cities of the face of the Earth. The war was going to stop in a matter of months. The bomb hurt the U.S. relations with Russia because the U.S. didn’t warn them and most importantly innocent people died for no reason. Just to stop a war and make a point. Two cities were gone in a matter of seconds and too many dead.

Branch Brook Park in Newark during the Cherry Blossom Festival. © 2003 Matthew Trump. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It’s springtime, and the cherry trees are in full bloom. All across the country, anywhere where cherry trees grow, beautiful pink flowers are bursting forth to tell everyone that it’s time to celebrate spring. In fact, we’re halfway through as of yesterday. 

Cherry Blossom festivals are also blossoming everywhere from San Francisco to Washington DC. I went to one this last week, put on by the Diversity Achievement Center at Linn Benton Community College. It was a nice time, celebrating Japanese culture. Displaying student art, poetry, traditional Japanese food, and a Taiko Drumming demonstration.

My haiku perfectly fits the main idea of the Cherry Blossom festivals from America to Japan, which are to celebrate the ephemeral nature of life. Based around the Japanese concept of mono no aware (moe-no-no-ahwar-ay), literally meaning “the path of things”. The word describes awareness of all things temporal. It’s a peaceful symbol, equated with the simple passing of time in nature, and the gentle sadness at the ending of something short lived.

But few people celebrating know that cherry blossoms as a symbol have a darker history than one would think. During World War 2, they helped unite the Jaoanese people to fight against the Americans. They became a symbol, inciting intense nationalism and militaristic pride among the masses. Used in propaganda, they inspired the Japanese spirit, comparing warriors to cherry blossoms. Warriors were “ready like the myriad cherry blossoms to scatter.” As the flowers have also been used as metaphors for clouds (from blooming “en masse”), Japanese literature encouraged the troops to endure their suffering in China and around the islands, likening the cherry blossoms to dead soldiers.

Instead of flowers celebrating simple, ephemeral life, they became “flowers of death”, being painted on the sides of planes being flown on suicide missions. The soldiers would even take a branch with them on their mission, showing their pride to be like a cherry blossom. People’s association of the cherry blossoms had changed so much during that time that cherry petals falling to the ground have now come to symbolize the sacrifice of many young Japanese in honor of the Emperor. They signify the young people who lived a short, sweet life, and then (in the cherry blossom likeness) in due course with nature, fell to the earth with grace and beauty.

                The Nazis were irrational about the acts and crimes they committed.  They killed millions of innocent Jewish people and others who were completely innocent.  They did not have a reason for the mass genocide they committed.  According to The United States Holocaust Museum, many Jews served their country and were decorated war heroes who were proud to live in Germany (“Nazi Camps”).  The Museum, in the same article, also states that fourteen Jewish-German people won the Noble Prize in the thirty years before the Holocaust.  The concentration camps that the Nazi regime used to kill the millions of Jewish people in their country and in other countries had significant and lasting effects on the society of the Jewish people. 

                A concentration camp is defined by The Oxford Dictionary as “A camp where non-combatants of a district are accommodated” (qtd. in “Concentration Camps”).  Beginning in 1933, the Nazis created 20,000 camps to punish and kill enemies of the state.  Dewey Browder states that although the camps were originally created to hold the Nazi’s political enemies, they were later intended solely to kill Jews and various others such as Roma, homosexuals, and people with mental and physical disabilities.  These concentration camps that Hitler and the Nazis built were used to accomplish their goal as a regime, which was to have the entire Europe be controlled by the Aryan race (“Victims”).  Life was difficult in the camps where roll call was repeated twice daily at three in the morning and five at night and there were often no rules pertaining to guards in these camps, so they beat prisoners frequently.  The events that happened in the camps were extremely brutal.  Nazis gassed up to 800 people at a time, and screams and shrieks were heard as the innocent prisoners died (Fiedman and Berenbaum).  These atrocities were hideous reminders of the Holocaust, and there were many things that led to the camps that affected the entire European Jewish population.

                Government wide boycotts, pogroms or religious persecutions, and racism led to the Holocaust and the notorious concentration camps of Nazi Germany.  The events that most likely had the most effect on the beginning of the holocaust were the boycotts and pogroms of Jewish citizens.  Robert Jackson states that during two nights in November of 1938, a pogrom occurred where the SS, or Schutzstaffel, troops killed 1,500 guiltless Jews and sent 30,000 Jews to concentration camps.  These pogroms were basically the beginning of a nationwide anti-Semitism belief that left Jews in camps where they were either executed, or worked to death.   To supplement the pogroms in the hatred against the Jews, the Nazi government put boycotts on Jewish businesses, and even some people that never considered themselves Jewish were boycotted due to the Nuremburg Laws.  On the first day of these boycotts, April 1, 1933, German storm troopers painted stars of David across the windows of Jewish shops, claiming not to buy from them (“Boycott of Jewish Businesses”).    If the boycotts and pogroms were not enough, Hitler ordered that all civil jobs were strictly for Aryans.  This led to the firing of every Jewish teacher and government worker.  This nationwide prejudice of the Jewish population led to the creation of the concentration camp and ultimately left a lasting effect on the Jewish people.  Once the camps were installed, the horrible killings started, and did not end until the conclusion of Hitler’s reign. 

                The killings in the Nazi concentration camps were taken to extremes.  In his article, Flint Whitlock states, “Sparks soon arrived at the crematorium where he saw piles of emaciated corpses, stacked nearly to the ceiling.”  This only starts to describe what happened at these camps.  When prisoners first entered the camps, they were given an examination.  Those suitable for work were sent off to labor until they died, while those who weren’t were simply executed, whether it be gas chamber or firing squad.  The most painful way of death in these camps was by medical experimentation.  Dr Mengelo, the most well known doctor during the time of the holocaust, performed tests on children and killed people by lethal injection just to study their internal organs, believing that his work would give him scientific honors (Feidman and Berenbaum).  After the Jews were exterminated, their bodies were looted by the SS troops for any valuables such as gold rings and other jewelry, which if found were put into the Reichsbank under the SS account.  After the hundreds of bodies were confiscated of valuables, they were sent to the cremation center where they were cremated.  The death of millions was obvious, and, “As the rate of extermination increased, heaps of ashes accumulated by the pits, whose smoke was visible from far away.  The distinct smell of burning flesh permeated the area” (Feidman and Berenbaum).  The Jews and others were taken advantage of in the worst ways possible.  Even German businesses benefitted from this. For example, I.G. Farben used the cheap labor from the camps to produce goods for a great profit, but over 25,000 people died as a result of the overwork in the factories (Dewey Browder).  Once again, the mass murder of Jews throughout Germany and other countries left major effects on the Jewish population.  The knowledge of the camps throughout Nazi territory would also cause lasting bewilderment on the side of the people. 

                                The Nazi camps were eventually liberated by the two Allied forces at the time, the Americans and the Russians. Although this happened, millions were killed as a result, and the culture of the Jews was affected significantly. The Jewish people to this day remember these camps and look back at them in fear.  At Dachau, one of the biggest camps, some 32,000 prisoners were saved.  The American and Russian militaries did not have good enough medicine to cure diseases evident in the camps.  Realistically, only 30,000 prisoners lived.  Even though the camps were eventually shut down, they killed enough people to upset the Jewish society.

                The concentration camps created a scar in the German society that society remembers today.  This is evident when Jackson states, “You will have difficulty, as I have, to look into the faces of the defendants and believe that in this Twentieth Century human beings could inflict such sufferings as will be proved here on their own countrymen as well as upon their so-called inferior enemies.”  This anti-Semitism that the Nazis practiced has proved prevalent throughout the history of Europe, and is still much too common around the world (“Victims”).  With the Holocaust being the single biggest war crime in all of history, and the death for millions of innocent Jews, it left many parts of Europe without many Jews.  Most Jews will nowadays live in different areas of the world because their families moved or were relocated due to the Holocaust.  The killings of Jews in the camps around Germany were so severe in the later years of Hitler’s reign, in 1942, only twenty percent of the people who died in the Holocaust were dead.  Fourteen months later, an astonishing eighty percent of the people to be killed were already dead (Fiedman and Berenbaum).  In 1933 alone, the Nazi party killed over 500,000 Jewish people (Jackson).  The extensive killings and racism by Nazis against the Jews left a major effect on the Jewish society, where the fear of anti-Semitism is excessive.  The Jewish people will always hold the Nazis and the country Germany  responsible for the atrocities they did to their people.

                The society of the Jewish people was affected severely by the concentration camps used to exterminate Jews during World War II.  The concentration camps destroyed a society and culture of Jewish people throughout Germany.  The pogroms and boycotts of Jewish people were also prevalent in making a lasting effect on the society.  Even the citizens of Germany, who had no idea of the camps, created sorrow, because the Jews felt that they could have helped them.  The Jewish society could have been much less affected by these happenings if someone had taken a step forward and attempted to prevent them before they were able to kill millions of Jews. 

Works Cited

“Boycott of Jewish Businesses.”  United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.  United States Holocaust

     Memorial Museum. 6 January 2011. Web. 7 December 2011.    

Browder, Dewey A. “Concentration Camps, German (1933-1945).”  History and the Headlines.  ABC-

CLIO. 2011. Web. 1 December 2011. .

“Concentration Camps.”  International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.  Encyclopedia.com 2008.

     Web. 18 December 2011. .

Feidman Nira, and Michael Berenbaum.  “Camps.”  Jewish Virtual Library.  The American-Israeli

     Cooperative Enterprise.  2008.  Web.  1 December 2011.

    .

Jackson, Robert.  “Nuremburg Trials.”  A Teacher’s Guide to the Holocaust.  University of South Florida.

     2005. Web. 7 December 2011.  .

“Nazi Camps.”   United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.  United States Holocaust Memorial

     Museum. 6 January 2011. Web. 1 December 2011.  

     .

“Victims.”  A Teacher’s guide to the Holocaust.  University of South Florida.  2005.  Web. 

     7 December 2011.  .

Whitlock, Flint.  “Liberating Dachau.”  World War II.  March 2000: 26+.  SIRS Issues Researcher.  Web.

                29 November 2011. 

Image via Wikipedia

‘The Boy in the Stripped Pajamas’, written by John Boyne, is a historical fiction that is based on the events of the Second World War. The protagonist, Bruno, is a nine year old boy, who is the son of a high German commandant who is leader of the concentration camp, Auschwitz. As the protagonist is thrust in the midst of an adult’s war, he finds himself befriending on of the many Jewish boys, Shmuel, that are enslaved by his own father. They are alike in many ways, an obvious strategy of the author to demonstrate the likeness of two social classes that are unreasonably set apart, and to demolish any ‘us and them’ mentality that could arise when reading. However, many have questioned the theory of Bruno and Shmuel having more similar traits than different, despite the countless points that demonstrate this. One of these arguments are the situations that both boys are put into and the psychological effect of these situations on the children are metaphorically similar, despite the circumstances being physically different. Another is common traits, such as bravery, friendship and respect that are admired from both boys, regardless of the disparity in their upbringing. The last is the tragic result of the events that have placed both boys in danger, ironically occurring simultaneously and at the same place regardless of the obstacles that had recently prevented the protagonist Bruno from entering in the midst’s of direct danger of the camp.

                The circumstances in which both boys are set are, admittedly, physically different, however, they both represent a similar point; children that are the victims of an adult’s war, simply because of their lack of conforming and/or rebellious actions. In the story, both boys give a person anecdote, recounts of their previous lives, before they were sent to Auschwitz (Shmuel as a prisoner, Bruno as the commandants company), which were notably happier, carefree, and-ultimately-more like the typical stereotype of a childhood.  However, in both accounts, their lives are considerably changed after their arrival at the camp, whether because of the sudden loss of companions, or the gradual loss of rights and freedom. This is displayed in the text as the protagonist is seen talking to his new found friend about how they came to resign in Auschwitz: “’That happen to me too!’ shouted Bruno, delighted that he wasn’t the only boy who’d been forced to move.” (p128) In the analysis of this quote, we must ask ourselves who is forcing these people to move, and evidently, one would come to the conclusion of adults. This is clearly shows how both these boys are affected by the war that is held by adults and are tragically forced to participate, whether as bystanders or victims and, as this is a major theme in the text, it is now obvious that Bruno and Shmuel are more alike that not.

                Another feature that is seen in the text that supports the theory of Bruno and Shmuel more being similar than different, is the common traits that are admired by both bys, despite their different upbringing that would suggest other words. Examples of these traits are bravery, loyalty, respect and courtesy, and both boys trying to uphold the expectation of morality that has arisen between them. An example of loyalty is shown when Bruno betrays Shmuel and is overcome with guilt, while Shmuel is also disapproving of his friend’s behavior, not only because he is feeling deceived.  However, another scene portrays how both boys are alike in that they both uphold and admire courtesy and respect: “…and the last thing he wanted was for Shmuel to think he was being unkind” (112). In this quote, it is seen that Bruno is willing to keep quite and chooses not to speak his mind, simply because he can sense that they (Shmuel and himself) both agree that it is considered unacceptable, and doesn’t want his friend to believe him immoral or ‘unkind’. This quote clearly shows how the social expectations that are present are upheld by both boys, making them more alike than different.

               By “Peanut” (R.M from KDC)

Discuss

Conformity. Everyone does it but no one wants to admit it, presumably brought up by the Second World War. The text, The Boy in the Stripped Pyjamas by John Boyne is a fictional recount of the events of the war and provides many examples of conformity. However, many would like to believe that a catastrophe as large and as horrific as that cannot repeat itself because of the new awareness of conformity, but have we really eliminated it from our society? Many points of the argument must be taken into consideration before a final judgement is made, such as if ingrained social class and behaviour expectations still remains in society. It must also be considered whether society has indeed strengthened itself against a large body of one opinion, which can be seen today in the many opinions that are shared and acknowledged when electing a leader for most first world countries in the democratic system and strange or weird individuals that are accepted into society, despite their difference, an example of which is the gay rights campaign.

            Ingrained social class that is still present in the world today is an example of conformity still being powerful. An example of this in the text is portrayed by the main protagonist, Bruno, a nine year old boy, son of a high German Commandant, who is quoted asking his sister a question: “[Bruno] ‘I want to know about the fence…I want to know why it’s there’… ‘Because they have to be kept together,’ explained Gretel. ‘With their families you mean?’ [Gretel] ‘Well yes with their families. But with their own kind too.’ (pp 181 – 182). This clearly shows how social class was enforced on children in the past, making them label people with an ‘Us and Them’ mentality. However, it is still seen today; parents telling their children that to not play with those kids, simply because they are a different race or have a different religion, struggling financially or are academically disadvantaged are all enforcing their children with opinionated social class.

            Behaviour expectations that repeatedly occur in society are another example of conformity and followed with an utmost strictness. It is displayed in the book as Bruno’s parents attempt him to implement ethics in the form of manners on him; “And don’t interrupt your mother when she is talking…’ she [Mother] added, for although this was strange and unpleasant news, there was certainly need for Bruno to break the rules of politeness which he had been taught.”(pp 7). This is still seen in everyday routine, from simply saying thank you or holding the door out for someone, as it something that is expected in our society. It is also displayed when Bruno is told that he has to follow the rules but his parents or ’superiors’ don’t: “’Bruno, just do it, please!’ Mother snapped, because apparently it was all right if she interrupted him but it didn’t work the other way round” (pp 14-15). This is also seen in the present day, and even has a cliché made for it: ‘Children should be seen and not heard’. This was evidently followed in the past and still continues today, by the common stifling or hushing of a child’s ideas and opinions when the adults are talking, seen in  elections where only adults get to vote, children, however, do not get a say. It is also displayed with the common belief that children should respect their elders and obey their parents that still continues today.

            The many individuals that are seen today, which are still accepted into society (an example of which is  the new gay rights) are all illustrations of how conformity has been rejected in society. In history homosexuals were discriminated against, shunned even murdered because of their sexual difference. Nonetheless today, despite the past prejudice against them, they are now accepted in our society, are given the right to adopt and the right to be presented as a married couple. The text on the other hand shows a mutual loathing for people out of the ordinary or the ‘out’ group, presented with the character of Grandmother; ‘Grandfather was very proud of his son when he saw him in his new uniform but Grandmother was the only one who seemed unimpressed…’ (pp 90).Grandmother’s different views soon lead to conflict between her and her family. “’Ashamed!’ she called out before she left. ‘That a son of mine should be-’. ‘A patriot!’ cries Father…’A patriot indeed!’ she cried out. ‘The people you have to dinner in this house. Why, it makes me sick. And to see that uniform makes me want to tear the eyes from my head!’ she added before storming out of the house and slamming the door behind her.‘ (pp 93) As grandmother was an individual and didn’t conform like the majority of the German population , and so her difference lead to the isolated of her own family, when they later moved to Auschwitz. On the other hand, today the public is continuing to learn to accept others for who they are.

The democratic system supported by most modern day countries that takes into account the many viewpoints when deciding their leader is another point that gives evidence that the advanced society is not a slave to conformity. In this system, opinions, despite them contradicting, are shared respected and taken into consideration. This shows that people are willing to live with that the fact that there are other views in the world and that they cannot enforce their own on others. In the text, it is shown an almost complete opposite of democracy: dictatorship, in the form of the ‘Fury’ (referring to Adolph Hitler’s title, , who rules over his lover Eva without a question in his authority. It is seen on page 122 and “’Eva,’ shouted the Fury from the other room, clicking his fingers as if she were some sort of puppy dog…’It was lovely to meet you both’, she [Eva] said, before stepping into the dining room and sitting down on the Fury’s left-hand side.” (pp 122-123). It is also seen again when Father attempts to dictator his family, “’…and that’s an end to the matter. I don’t want to hear another word on the subject…’ said Father.” In the majority of organisations today, whether it being families, partners or politics, all participants get a say in what happens, an element in society that was not present in the past.

            As it is evident that a society cannot exist without conformity of some sort, however, there are many points that suggest that it is still powerful, such as the ingrained social class expectations of behaviour, and many that indicate that it has subsided to the bare minimal, like different opinions that are taken into considerations in the democratic political system and the ability to accept difference, seen in the recent homosexuals rights campaign. Taking all that into thought it is seen that although numerous cases have been perceived and eradicated, there are many more that are almost undetectable but are still powerful in a present day society.

 By “Peanut” (R.M from KDC)

The bombings actually had more meaning than simply ending the war. Each interpretation of the bombings has an obvious link to the interests of the United States. Because of these special interests, the morality and ethics of the bombing is questionable. It is obvious that the United States was the only country who stood to gain anything from the bombings.

Image via Wikipedia

Some may say that we had to end the war so that we could put ourselves in a better position in the world; this position would later enable us to help other countries. Others argue that our actions were selfish, ruthless, and outright destructive. Although there are many opinions on the atomic bombing of Japan, we cannot change history; we can only reflect upon our past actions and strive to be better.

Military Reasons for Bombing

One of the most popular explanations for the bombing was for military reasons, to end the war immediately. Ending the war promptly prevented the need for future invasions, which saved more lives in the long run. Based on previous battles with Japan, the United States knew that more battles would result in a great deal of bloodshed. (Oh, n.d.) The Japanese army was determined to fight us with everything they had, which meant there were a lot of casualties.

End the War Quickly by Forcing Surrender

Shortly before the atomic bombs were dropped, it was obvious that Japan was near defeat but they were not necessarily ready to surrender. There was no question that we would defeat Japan, but the United States wanted to do so more quickly than it was happening. The atomic bomb was more about ending the war as immediately than it was about defeating Japan. (Cooper, 2000)

Keep Russia Out of the War

Russia was eager to join the war in order to help us defeat Japan, but we did not want their help. The United States feared Russian involvement because we did not want Russia to feel entitled to gaining anything, such as territory in Asia, from the imminent defeat. To allow such a territorial gain would surely mean the spread of Communism, which the United States did not want because we considered Russia one of our greatest enemies at the time. One of the main motivations for dropping the bombs was to force Japan to surrender; we knew that this tool was key in getting the Emperor to end the fighting. (Cooper, 2000)

Image via Wikipedia

Political Reasons for Bombing

In addition to military reasons, there were also many political reasons behind the bombing of Japan. The creation and testing of the atomic bomb was a very expensive project, so many government officials felt that the value of the bomb must be demonstrated by using it in the war. (Oh, n.d.) If it was not used, then it would seem like a waste of government funding because its true potential would not be seen. The United States felt that the physical and psychological power of the bomb needed to be demonstrated to the world.

Intimidation Tool 

Not only did we want other countries to know we had a powerful weapon, we wanted them to fear it. Many people suggest that one of the reasons we used the bomb was to intimidate the Russians, which has some truth to it. Soviet Russia was considered an enemy of the United States; the bomb showed them and the rest of the world what we had in our arsenal. One of our greatest fears was that Russia would attempt to expand into Asia. The bomb obviously had political implications on the rest of the world, especially Russia. The United States showed the world that we did not need Russia’s help to defeat Japan and gave us a strong hand for future negotiations. (Oh, n.d.)

Social Reasons for Bombing

There are also social reasons behind the bombings of Japan. At that point in history, the average American disliked Japan and the Japanese people a great deal. These tensions had been building ever since the 19th century and eventually peaked when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. (Oh, n.d.) The bombing of Japan can be viewed as retaliation; the United States bombed them because of Pearl Harbor and their terrible treatment of American prisoners of war.

POW’s were tortured and killed during this time in history and the American people were outraged. Despite the obvious dislike between the United States and Japan, this social reason alone is not why we bombed Japan. The government insists that the bomb was originally intended for Nazi Germany, but the bomb was not ready prior to their surrender on May 7th. (Oh, n.d.)

Image via Wikipedia

Image via Wikipedia

Was it Justified?

Every attempt to justify the bombing of Japan is met with resistance. We can see that the decision to bomb Japan was not based on one reason, but rather a culmination of reasons from different points of view in the United States government. The military, politicians, and the American people each had their own reasons for supporting the bombing at the time. Although each of these reasons together are historically why Japan was bombed, it does not mean that all of them were fair and justified. This piece of our history illustrates America as arrogant and powerful. Although we may not consider arrogance a good trait, at that time it was necessary. The bombing of Japan played a key role in the end of WWII and subsequent history, despite seemingly compromised morals and ethics.

References

Cooper, J. (2000) Truman’s Motivations: Using the Atomic Bomb in the Second World War. Retrieved on August 9, 2011 from http://www.johnwcooper.com/papers/atomicbombtruman.htm

Oh, J. (n.d.) Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The Decision to Drop the Bomb. Retrieved on August 9, 2011 from http://www.umich.edu/~historyj/pages_folder/articles/Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki/pdf

Hysteria: Behavior exhibiting excessive or uncontrollable emotion, such as fear or panic.

Hunch: A stooped or curled posture; a slouch, also means a theory, idea or a guess.

Hypnosis: A trancelike state, artificially induced, in which a person has a heightened suggestibility, and in which suppressed memories may be experienced.

Hyper: Having an increased state of activity.

Human: Belonging to the species Homo sapiens or its closest relatives.

Holy: Dedicated to a religious purpose or a god or gods.

Holocaust: The mass murder of Jews and other groups by the Nazi regime during World War II.

Home: One’s own dwelling place; the house or structure in which one lives; especially the house in which one lives with his family; the habitual abode of one’s family; also, one’s birthplace; The place where a person was raised; Childhood or parental home; home of one’s parents or guardian.

Heebie-Jeebies: A general feeling of anxiety, fear, uneasiness, or nausea.

BONUS:

Preparation H: Ointment to treat hemorrhoids, wrinkles from skin and heal dry, cracked, and irritated skin.

-

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with A

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with B

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with C

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with D

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with E

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with F

Click here for 10 interesting words that starts with G

But the one man whose opinion mattered the most–Josef Stalin–refused to accept the findings recorded in Shkravaski’s forensic report. He dispatched his secret police chief, Lavrenty Beria, to Berlin to review the autopsy results and associated evidence and bring everything back to Moscow. (For reasons that remain unclear, however, Smersh had already removed and reburied the human and canine corpses that Shkravaski’s team had examined, and refused to dig them up and turn them over to the secret police.) Stalin rejected the autopsy’s conclusions out of hand.

Then, on 26 May, during a Kremlin meeting with President Roosevelt’s chief adviser Harry Hopkins, and diplomats Averell Harriman and Charles (Chip) Bohlen, Stalin said that he believed Hitler had escaped from Berlin and was hiding in the West. Stalin was not making diplomatic small talk; he was launching a disinformation campaign that he had personally devised and directed.

The next version of this myth appeared in the 28 May edition of Time, which featured Hitler’s portrait on its cover with a large cross through it. According to a certain “Pvt. Ivan Nikitin,” a German SS officer had revealed under interrogation that he had heard Hitler ranting and raving about a coming conflict between the USSR and its western Allies once the war had concluded. (Hitler, in fact, anticipated the Cold War in a document known as “My Political Testament.”) But, “Nikitin” claimed, Hitler said that as long as he was still alive the wartime alliance would remain intact. The world would have to be convinced that he was dead. Once the former allies found themselves in conflict, he would reappear and lead the German people to their final victory over Bolshevism. The same “Nikitin” claimed that behind an armoire in the bunker was a moveable concrete wall with a man-size hole in it. On the other side of the wall was a passageway leading to a tunnel where an army troop train was waiting to take Hitler and his entourage to safety.

Next, Stalin dispatched Andrei Vyshinsky, the notorious prosecutor in the Moscow show trials of the late 1930s, to Berlin to brief Marshal Georgy Zhukov on the new line on Hitler. (Zhukov said on record that he believed Hitler was dead.) The Soviet marshal was at the height of his fame and popularity, and had been called the greatest Russian commander since Suvorov. For Stalin, who feared and usually eliminated potential rivals, it was time to cut him down to size. At a 9 June press conference–the first since the Western press had been allowed into the Soviet-controlled city–Zhukov, with Vyshinsky at his side, offered a new version of Hitler’s fate. The Führer’s “present whereabouts are unknown,” he said. Zhukov denied reports circulating in Berlin that the Soviets had found a corpse that “could be Hitler’s.” He added that: “Based on personal and official information, we can only say that Hitler had a chance to get away with his bride [Eva Braun, who married the Führer hours before they committed suicide]. Hitler could have flown out at the very last minute.” Zhukov’s “personal view” was that Hitler had taken refuge in Spain.

The new Soviet version went out over the press wires the next day, providing grist for hundreds if not thousands of Hitler sightings for many years to come. Vyshinsky then accompanied Zhukov to Frankfurt, where the marshal briefed Gen. Eisenhower on the new Soviet line. Eisenhower later told the press that he had changed his mind about Hitler and believed the Nazi dictator might still be alive.

In July Stalin acted again. At the Big Three summit in Potsdam, Germany, Stalin told US Secretary of State James F. Byrnes that he believed Hitler was living in Spain or Argentina. He repeated this in the presence of Adm. William D. Leahy, President Truman’s military adviser. On other occasions, Stalin speculated that Hitler had made his way to Hamburg and left Germany for Japan on board a U-boat; or that he was hiding in Germany in the British occupation zone.

Operation Myth was officially launched in December 1945. Its mission was threefold: To (1) gather and review all records and forensic evidence collected during May-June 1945; (2) check and recheck interrogation reports from Hitler’s bunker entourage; and (3) reconcile or explain inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence. A commission chaired by the USSR’s preeminent criminologist, Dr. Pytor Semenovsky, and controlled from behind the scenes by Beria, began by tearing up Shkravaski’s autopsy and rejecting the evidence on which it was based. This gives some idea of what the commission’s unstated purpose was: to produce a report that confirmed or at least was compatible with Stalin’s belief that Hitler was–or at least might be–still alive. After reexamining all the evidence, the Semenovsky commission concluded it was “not…possible to arrive at a final conclusion” regarding Hitler. That may have been less decisive than Stalin wanted, but apparently it was as far as the scientists believed they could go in stretching the truth to please Stalin.

Above all, the brutal interrogation of witnesses demonstrated how obsessed Stalin was with finding proof that Hitler might be alive. Smersh detained some 800 (!) persons, and 21 of 35 key witnesses were arrested and interrogated in Berlin and Moscow–often repeatedly and brutally. Some of the witnesses were imprisoned for 10 years or more on trumped up war crimes charges. The Soviets went to great lengths to locate Hitler’s relatives. They even arrested his half-sister, a simple Austrian peasant woman whom Hitler had last seen in 1907, as well as her husband and a half-brother Hitler had never even laid eyes on. The focus of the endless interrogations, which filled tens of thousands of pages, was to prove that Hitler could have survived and that the people he spent his last days with had engaged in a systematic deception to convince the world otherwise.

The Smershisti tried to beat confessions out of their prisoners. Heinz Linge, Hitler’s valet, was stripped, tied down, and then beaten with whips as his German-speaking interrogators shouted: “Hitler is alive! Hitler is alive!” Two other key witnesses, Hitler’s SS adjutant Otto Günsche, and the Führer’s personal pilot, Hans Baur, reported similar experiences after returning home in 1956. In Baur’s case, interrogators spent hours trying to force him to admit that it had been possible for Hitler to fly out of the Berlin inferno. Witnesses were forced to write and rewrite their accounts of the final days in the bunker. The Soviets even partially reconstructed the bunker and, using mannequins, had witnesses reenact Hitler’s and Eva Braun’s suicides. Tables and charts were used to plot testimonies against one another in an effort to identify inconsistencies as well as corroborating information.

Imprisoning Hitler’s entourage was not aimed so much at uncovering the truth as concealing it. Other steps were taken in the same direction. Stalin ordered that the human and animal remains found in Berlin be hidden. (Strangely, he did not demand their return to Moscow, where they presumably would have been of value to Semenovsky’s team.) The Smershisti buried the remains first in Rathenow, then in Stendal. In February 1946, in Magdeburg, the remains were finally buried in the courtyard of an apartment house commandeered by the Red Army. There they remained until April 1970, when KGB chief Yuri Andropov, with Politburo approval, ordered Meropriyatiya Arkhiv (Measure or Operation Archive). Under the guise of searching for long-lost Nazi records, a KGB team excavated what was by then a garage on a Soviet military base and removed the remains of nine persons, including Hitler and Eva Braun. (The base was about to be turned over to the East German government.) The remains, now a “jellied mass” according to a KGB report, were pulverized, soaked in gasoline, and then completely burned up. The ashes were mixed with coal particles and then taken 11 kilometers north of Magdeburg, where they were dumped into the Bideriz, a tributary of the Elbe river.

The Soviet government kept the Hitler file completely secret until 1968, when it revealed some of the truth–along with some deliberate distortions–in the West but not in the USSR. That was the year in which a journalist named Lev Bezymensky published the results of the official Soviet investigation into Hitler’s death and two autopsies performed on the Nazi leader’s remains. The book appeared in English in the United States and Britain, but not in Russian and not in the USSR. In 1993, the Yeltsin government granted access to the KGB’s Mif files and released photographs of the skull fragments to a Russian and a British journalist. But their book also was published only in English and only in the United States and Britain. Now, thanks to the Moscow exhibit, foreigners will be able to examine artifacts that they may have heard about but were never allowed to see, while Russians will see for the first time objects and documents that they never knew existed.

By late March 1945, the Red Army had encircled Berlin and begun its final assault with a massive artillery shelling. The Germans’ strong resistance, however, forced the Soviets to fight block by block and house by house before they raised the hammer-and-sickle ensign over the Reichstag. Stalin dispatched special “trophy brigades,” organized by Smersh (military counterintelligence), to search for art and other valuables, official records and archives, and anything else of exceptional material and intelligence value. But the most prized trophy was Hitler himself, and selected Smershisti received extensive briefings on how to locate and identify the Führer. On 4 May, a unit attached to the 79th Rifle Corps of the Third Shock Army and under the command of Lt. Col. Ivan Klimenko discovered the badly charred remains of 11 humans and two animals (Hitler’s dogs) in shallow graves–actually bomb craters–a few meters away from the entrance to the bunker, where Hitler and his entourage had taken refuge since March.

The badly burned bodies were taken to a clinic commandeered as a makeshift morgue in the north Berlin suburb of Buch, where a four-man military medical team headed by a physician with the improbable name of Dr. Faust Shkravaski concluded that Hitler’s remains were among those found near the bunker. Shkravaski did not have much to work with, but there was enough left of Hitler’s teeth, lower jaw, and dental work to make a positive identification. Odontological evidence collected from the office of Hitler’s dentist, the dentist’s assistant, and a dental technician who had made bridgework for the Führer formed the basis of the evidence. By 9 May, when the autopsies were completed, the Soviets knew that Hitler was dead.

Image by Marion Doss via Flickr

Image by Marion Doss via Flickr

R.I.P.

Dear Mrs. Smithson,

I suspect that you have been waiting a long time for a letter from these parts. It saddens me deeply that you are to receive a letter like this as your very first. I write to you with a strong sense of anger, pain, and regret.

As you can tell by my formal greeting I am not your son Timothy Smithson, I am merely a trench buddy who has found myself entangled in the warmth and cheer that was given to us by your son.

                Like many of the other soldiers that shared the disgusting, rat filled, living graveyard we temporarily called home, Tim very quickly realized that this war was more then anything imaginable.

                I remember the first day when Timothy was assigned to be in the front. I watched curiously over the heaping piles of dead bodies, and sandbags in the opposite direction of No Mans Land. Although this position was very dangerous, I always found myself attracted to the arrival of newly assigned soldiers. The look in their eyes that beamed as bright as the suns rays, and then the instant change of fear, horror, and disgust as they approach the front line. Tim’s reaction was of no exception although he tried to hide it.

                Most of the men that were in the front line were Canadians. The only British soldiers were three in number including myself. At this time we were trying to stop the Germans from gaining access to the English Channel. If they had access to this channel there was no telling how much damage they could do. So it was our duty to make sure this didn’t happen. There was no intelligent planning put into how this matter was to be dealt with. British officials just ordered their allies to go Over-the-top into No Mans Land, without knowing what was on the other side. Often times the Canadians were the first to go because in the eyes of the British “they were only Canadians.” But Tim to me has been a great example of what exactly the Canadian soldiers were. And he has proven to many other British soldiers how strong, proud, and devoted the Canadian soldiers were, despite the way they were treated by the British heads.

                Everyday Tim would share with us about his goals that he wanted to accomplish while he was here. He had wished to become one of the bravest soldiers in the war. “Yes, an honor so great the Queen herself would present it to me,” he would say with a courteous bow, and a pleasant smile.  He often joked about the state of the trench making it easier for everyone around him to cope with their surrounding. He was the life of the not so live party, but there was also a very seriousness about him. 

Tim was very respectful of the dead that surrounded us. In fact he made it a duty that everyone who had died was given a moment of silence. He believed that every man out there died for one thing, whether he said it or not and it was honor.

                I still remember the dreaded day that poor Tim fought his last battle. The Officials had ordered all the men in the front line to advance into No Mans Land, but there had to be a certain number. They must have thought that it was a lucky number, or something of that sort. They sent one of the officials to take back four men out of all the men in the front. Those four would wait until the next advance to go Over-the-top. The official quickly chose the three British soldiers that were there, and then he pointed to Tim as the last of the four excused men.  

                Tim’s eyes widen as a sudden burst of relief swept over his small, but muscular body, but it was almost instantly followed with a straight stone cold look. It was the same look that swept over his face when he saw the heaping piles of the dead soldiers’ corps. Then Tim did the unthinkable. “I can’t Sir. I must go and advance into No Mans Land, excuse one of the other men in my place.” Those were his words. And I pulled him to the side and tried to convince him to stay, but he simply said, “If I stay I’ll die, if I go I die with honor.” Then he went with his troops and advanced.

                I stayed and wept bitterly. I knew that Tim had to do what his heart told him to do, but what about all the other soldiers that had no choice. Tim did it not for himself, but he did it for them.

                Tim did not return after the advance, actually only two men did, but died hours later from fatal injuries. I didn’t see the way he died, but was told by others that the Germans attacked with a weapon they called a machine gun. They said Timothy was only about two meters away from the enemies trench but was shot repeatedly and died shortly afterwards.

                I took the liberty of finding out his address and ways to contact you, with news of your son. Although it might be disturbing at first, I thought it was very necessary for Tim have you know all the wonderful things he has done during his short, but meaningful life.

                Although Tim didn’t get the glorious award presented to him by the Queen, He died with Honor, and I know that’s exactly what he would have wanted.

My deepest regrets to you and your family,   

Reginald Justice